SOC313: Social Implications of Medical Issues (CGF1711A)- Wk1 Discussion 1

Example 1: Claims About Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) Vaccine Causing Autism

Andrew Wakefield is a former physician, who is famous for his much disputed research on the connection between MMR vaccine and emergence of autism. Indeed, he misused the facts by distorting scientific information. In this fallacy, Correlation vs. Causation (also known as “false cause”), Wakefield et al. (1998) base the suggestion on two issues that are critical nowadays – autism and vaccination. In the 1998 research paper, the authors claim that there is a link between the administration of the MMR vaccine and the appearance of autism and bowel disease. The medical researcher correlates the occurrence of autism to the use of vaccination, referring to the experience of only 12 children. The information provided is misleading and the case obviously required a more thorough observation.

Example 2: Barack Obama Stating That Sarah Palin is not a Nuclear Expert

In the interview with ABC News, Obama demonstrates how people can come to irrelevant conclusions by basing their argument on unrelated statements or facts. The President’s reasoning against his administration’s nuclear policy seems to be an ad hominem against Sarah Palin (Travers, 2010). Ad hominem is an attack on an opponent’s personality and feelings, not intellect. Obama clearly uses this tactic, which makes his statements seem rather childish. The best approach for Obama would have been to challenge Palin’s claims by resorting to the history and importance of the policy idea in order to gain acceptance.

Example 3: Planned Parenthood Ad

The phrase “planned parenthood” is equivocate, that is, has two different implications. According to Ted Cruz, its meaning shifts between pro-choice and pro-life in the abortion argument (Corasaniti, 2016). Cruz actually uses equivocation to accuse the competing candidate Donald Trump of inconsistency. In actuality, Cruz and his team are the ones who are being inconsistent in their attempts to define Planned Parenthood. A voter can easily conclude from this ad that Trump is pro-choice, which seems to be Cruz’s objective. However, abortion is just one of the services that Planned Parenthood provides. Trump supports the program and the benefits it provides for women, but not abortion. The best way for Cruz to avoid this error was to use speech reasonably.

The abovementioned fallacies are only a few examples of how people can make erroneous arguments. Reasoning has a better effect when the speakers are proficient in the field and justify their decisions in light of the best available scientific, social and economic understanding.

References

Corasaniti, N. (2016). Ted Cruz ad goes after Donald Trump’s stance on Planned Parenthood. New York Times. Retrieved on 1 August 2016 from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/16/us/politics/ted-cruz-ad-goes-after-donald-trumps-stance-on-planned-parenthood.html

Travers, Karen (2010). 'Not much of an expert’ – Obama slaps Sarah Palin for nuke policy criticism. ABC News. Retrieved on 1 August 2016 from http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/exclusive-president-obama-slaps-sarah-palin-expert-nukes/story?id=10321775

Wakefield, A. J., Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., Linnell, J., Casson, D. M., Malik, M., & Valentine, A. (1998). Retracted: Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet, 351 (9103), 637-641.